The Supreme Court holds that the juvenile court acted within its discretion when it found that where appellant was a presumed father under Family Code section 7611, subdivision (d) because he received the child into his home and openly held him out to be his own, his admission that he was not the biological father did not require a finding that the presumption is rebutted under Family Code section 7612. This is true even if, as here, the presumed father is “not a paragon.” The presumed father’s relationship with and responsibility for the child is dispositive. Here there were no competing claims because whereabouts of the alleged father was unknown. The Court disapproved of In re Olivia H. (187) 196 Cal.App.3d 325 which denied presumptive parental status to a man who qualified as a presumed father except that a blood test established he was not the biological father.